Who is who on Climate-debate.com

Tim the plumber wrote:
Wow!

I have never had a whole thread as a fan club thing before. Shame it's not just for me!

Whilst you are here you might like to help out trafn. Please tell me if you have any science which says that the IPCC has underestimated the scale of the problem. If you do I suggest you start a new thread about it.

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
Wow!

I have never had a whole thread as a fan club thing before. Shame it's not just for me!

Whilst you are here you might like to help out trafn. Please tell me if you have any science which says that the IPCC has underestimated the scale of the problem. If you do I suggest you start a new thread about it.

Quite all right. I certainly don't mind our infamy being shared like this. I am honored to be in such company.

trafn wrote:
I am starting this thread for new members to use as a reference source when trying to understand who they are posting with on this website. Currently, Climate-debate.com is dominated by a few trolls who's goal is to prevent meaningful discussion about climate change science by posting harassing and intimidating content in response to those who do want to discuss in an adult-like fashion.

I have also started a thread asking branner, this website's administrator, to take immediate action to save Climate-debate.com from these and other trolls who commonly plague and destroy websites like this one. It is at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

I also moderate one sub-forum here called Sharing Ideas (SI), which is a harassment free sub-forum. Unfortunately, branner allows other members to extract content from SI and post it elsewhere on Cimate-debate.com solely for the purpose of harassing the person who made the original post in SI, but doing it in a thread where they are free from the SI no-harassment guidelines. Worse yet, they are allowed to do this without the permission of the person who posted in SI.

Anyways, I appreciate any support you can give to turning this website around into a forum that is for adults and free of trolls.

In the meantime, I hope this thread is useful.

sealover wrote:
It was a year ago when I first became an official member of this club, but decided not to post.

I had checked out this site a few times in the years before that.

What is impressive about this post is that the vermin infestation had already taken root as far back as 2015.

Not much has changed since those earliest years of the site.

Not even the names of the vermin

WOW!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

trafn wrote:
I am starting this thread for new members to use as a reference source when trying to understand who they are posting with on this website. Currently, Climate-debate.com is dominated by a few trolls who's goal is to prevent meaningful discussion about climate change science by posting harassing and intimidating content in response to those who do want to discuss in an adult-like fashion.

I have also started a thread asking branner, this website's administrator, to take immediate action to save Climate-debate.com from these and other trolls who commonly plague and destroy websites like this one. It is at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

I also moderate one sub-forum here called Sharing Ideas (SI), which is a harassment free sub-forum. Unfortunately, branner allows other members to extract content from SI and post it elsewhere on Cimate-debate.com solely for the purpose of harassing the person who made the original post in SI, but doing it in a thread where they are free from the SI no-harassment guidelines. Worse yet, they are allowed to do this without the permission of the person who posted in SI.

Anyways, I appreciate any support you can give to turning this website around into a forum that is for adults and free of trolls.

In the meantime, I hope this thread is useful.

Into the Night wrote:

.

sealover wrote:
Greetings newcomers,

I draw your attention to this so you will be cautious.

This website has a notorious history.

So tragic.

sealover wrote:
People wanted to discuss a matter of tremendous importance to humanity.

sealover wrote:
What they got was a place where the unsuspecting were pounced upon by a team of sadists.

sealover wrote:
As a real world scientist, it is particularly enraging that so many trolls pretend that their position has something to do with valid science.

sealover wrote:
Frankly, I hate these guys and I've only known them a few weeks.

sealover wrote:
They probably aren't going away.

sealover wrote:
If they were capable of shame, they have left a rich trail of evidence with which to shame them.

sea lover wrote:Greetings newcomers ... This website has a notorious history.

seal over wrote:So tragic.

seal over wrote:People wanted to discuss a matter of tremendous importance to humanity.

seal over wrote:What they got was a place where the unsuspecting were pounced upon by a team of sadists.

seal over wrote:As a real world troll, I find it particularly hilarious to pretend that my position has something to do with valid science.

seal over wrote:Frank and I ate these pies and I've only known him a few weeks.

sealover wrote:
Scroll up for some beautiful images.

They certainly make a useful contribution to the climate debate, don't they.

Actually, they do!

At least they do, in this particular "climate debate".

The above images are the vampire standing outside the window.

But DON'T "be afraid, very afraid".

Vampires can only come in if they are invited.

If you don't respond, the vampire can't come in.

The vampire would never dare expose himself by presenting an original argument of his own.

Every sentence could be subjected to ridicule.

The vampire needs you to respond so that YOU present an argument that could have every sentence subjected to ridicule.

He's just a pathetic thing trying to scare you if you don't invite him in.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
Wow!

I have never had a whole thread as a fan club thing before. Shame it's not just for me!

Whilst you are here you might like to help out trafn. Please tell me if you have any science which says that the IPCC has underestimated the scale of the problem. If you do I suggest you start a new thread about it.

Quite all right. I certainly don't mind our infamy being shared like this. I am honored to be in such company.

You know that eventually everyone is going to want their own similar profile. People will start pissing off trafn just to make the cut and get their own ranking.

On that point, I'm sorry to say but, you saw what trafn wrote, I'm #1 and you guys are just second fiddle.

sealover wrote:
Is it still fun to be a genius?

You cannot imagine how much I envy you.

Irony missed the mark.

Into the Night wrote:

sealover wrote:
Is it still fun to be a genius?

You cannot imagine how much I envy you.

Irony missed the mark.

Mockery. No argument presented.

James_ wrote:
[quote]sealover wrote:
It was a year ago when I first became an official member of this club, but decided not to post.

I had checked out this site a few times in the years before that.

What is impressive about this post is that the vermin infestation had already taken root as far back as 2015.

Not much has changed since those earliest years of the site.

Not even the names of the vermin

WOW!

I think actually a few of these individuals were banned from a political forum and found a home here. I think I do understand the basis of natural climate change. It's as ITN once told me, I can't understand the Gulf Stream if I haven't been there. And yet I have sailed it on a freighter.
At the moment, IMO the entire climate debate became politicized when Al Gore got involved. With that said, it should actually be a discussion which isn't happening. Debates are about winning an argument. And what most people who are concerned with climate change do not consider, what about sustainability or conservation? These guys hate me because they say I'm an environmentalist.
That's worse than saying climate change or we need to lower CO2. They simply don't understand what they're talking about because they were exiled from a political forum.

sealover wrote:
I appreciate the insight.

It never occurred to me that they were exiles.

Well, my plan is try to make the echo chamber less comfortable for them.

Thank you for sharing. Seriously.

I hope we will see you sharing more. Good stuff!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

James_ wrote:
[quote]sealover wrote:
It was a year ago when I first became an official member of this club, but decided not to post.

I had checked out this site a few times in the years before that.

What is impressive about this post is that the vermin infestation had already taken root as far back as 2015.

Not much has changed since those earliest years of the site.

Not even the names of the vermin

WOW!

I think actually a few of these individuals were banned from a political forum and found a home here. I think I do understand the basis of natural climate change. It's as ITN once told me, I can't understand the Gulf Stream if I haven't been there. And yet I have sailed it on a freighter.
At the moment, IMO the entire climate debate became politicized when Al Gore got involved. With that said, it should actually be a discussion which isn't happening. Debates are about winning an argument. And what most people who are concerned with climate change do not consider, what about sustainability or conservation? These guys hate me because they say I'm an environmentalist.
That's worse than saying climate change or we need to lower CO2. They simply don't understand what they're talking about because they were exiled from a political forum.

James_ wrote:

sealover wrote:
I appreciate the insight.

It never occurred to me that they were exiles.

Well, my plan is try to make the echo chamber less comfortable for them.

Thank you for sharing. Seriously.

I hope we will see you sharing more. Good stuff!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

James_ wrote:
[quote]sealover wrote:
It was a year ago when I first became an official member of this club, but decided not to post.

I had checked out this site a few times in the years before that.

What is impressive about this post is that the vermin infestation had already taken root as far back as 2015.

Not much has changed since those earliest years of the site.

Not even the names of the vermin

WOW!

I think actually a few of these individuals were banned from a political forum and found a home here. I think I do understand the basis of natural climate change. It's as ITN once told me, I can't understand the Gulf Stream if I haven't been there. And yet I have sailed it on a freighter.
At the moment, IMO the entire climate debate became politicized when Al Gore got involved. With that said, it should actually be a discussion which isn't happening. Debates are about winning an argument. And what most people who are concerned with climate change do not consider, what about sustainability or conservation? These guys hate me because they say I'm an environmentalist.
That's worse than saying climate change or we need to lower CO2. They simply don't understand what they're talking about because they were exiled from a political forum.

There are basically 2 issues. How to change a political debate into a discussion?
And many people will not want to change their political view.
The 2nd issue is the science can be complicated. There are natural variations to regional climate variations. As an example, in another 100 to 200 years, the Delaware River will probably start freezing over again like it did in the mid 1700's.
Astrophysics actually explains that or just understanding moment of inertia. Basically if you have something that weighs 5.972 × 10^24 kg and rotates at 460 meters/second and orbits the Sun at 29.8 km/s, how does a shift of its mass influence those numbers?
With astrophysics then understanding the orbital velocity and the acceleration of the Sun's gravity needs to be considered. Then after this, how do aerosols influence the ozone layer? Then there's depletion of ground water, denuding forests, etc. which change refraction.
With refraction, a desert refracts light differently than a green space. Also vegetation absorbs solar radiation and converts CO2 and H2O into C6H12O6 while also creating fiber.
Basically there is no simple easy to understand answer.

seal over wrote:It was a long list at first.

seal over wrote:A lot of well-intentioned individuals joined in good faith.

seal over wrote:The list got a WHOLE LOT SHORTER when our two favorite trolls infested the place about 7 years ago.

seal over wrote:They were almost all that was left of the "who is who" by the time I got here.

IBdaMann wrote:

seal over wrote:It was a long list at first.

Two people. Into the Night and myself.

seal over wrote:A lot of well-intentioned individuals joined in good faith.

The list was created as a way for trafn to advertise his hatred of those wielding science, much as you are trying to do by resurrecting this thread.

seal over wrote:The list got a WHOLE LOT SHORTER when our two favorite trolls infested the place about 7 years ago.

The list got 50% longer when Tim the Plumber was added.

seal over wrote:They were almost all that was left of the "who is who" by the time I got here.

Yes. Since the board owner, Branner, would not ban us at trafn's mere insistence, trafn added Branner to the list as well, increasing the number to four.

The list had doubled in size since its creation.

What pissed me off was that Branner ended up in the #1 position. I had earned the top slot and yet I was denied just because of trafn's lack of professionalism.

.

sealover wrote:Who cares? Who are you addressing? Who do you think is going to see any of your posts? You may not be aware of it, but you are not as deeply loved as you imagine. Or maybe you can just go to that thread where everyone loves you so much. YOUR OWN! Dick.

IBdaMann wrote:
Projection, anyone?

sealover wrote:Who cares? Who are you addressing? Who do you think is going to see any of your posts? You may not be aware of it, but you are not as deeply loved as you imagine. Or maybe you can just go to that thread where everyone loves you so much. YOUR OWN! Dick.

Someone has issues.

sealover wrote:On a personal level, I find you to be a repulsive, vile, disgusting... not enough adjectives for how much I despise you.

sealover wrote:As a real world chemist, you enrage me on a different level.

sealover wrote:That is your scientific specialization, correct?

sealover wrote:Did you really think you could bluff ...

sealover wrote:Have you finally figured out that I really am a chemist?

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote:On a personal level, I find you to be a repulsive, vile, disgusting... not enough adjectives for how much I despise you.

How about contemptible, noxious, repugnant, despicable, abhorrent, revolting,
depraved? Those are some good ones.

sealover wrote:As a real world chemist, you enrage me on a different level.

I know. I enrage your religious sensitivities. I get it. I totally get it.

sealover wrote:That is your scientific specialization, correct?

I have many. You may also consider me this board's expert on the scientific method.

sealover wrote:Did you really think you could bluff ...

Nope. I gave up bluffing decades ago. I found it unnecessary. If I am honest, I don't have to keep track of all the lies I make and I never have to pivot or shift goalposts.

My policy is to strictly be honest and to stick with math, science, logic and economics. Remember, honesty is the best policy. You should give it a try for once.

sealover wrote:Have you finally figured out that I really am a chemist?

You should actually read my posts. I have said as much. You are a chemist. You are a liar. You are a warmizombie. I stick with direct observations.

sealover wrote:All the posts that I DID read when I first got here called me a LIAR about it.

sealover wrote:Do you ever read your own posts?

sealover wrote:They might offer some insight into why nobody likes to play with you.

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote:All the posts that I DID read when I first got here called me a LIAR about it.

No, I assure you, I simply called you a liar in general.

sealover wrote:Do you ever read your own posts?

Yes, after I write them.

sealover wrote:They might offer some insight into why nobody likes to play with you.

The reason nobody likes me is that nobody likes a know-it-all. It's why I don't have any friends.


Cheers.

sealover wrote:When a member literally LIBELS another, is there any recourse?

sealover wrote:It is a gray area for legal action.

sealover wrote:But shouldn't that be enough to get them banned.

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote:When a member literally LIBELS another, is there any recourse?

There is no such thing as libel on an anonymous forum.

sealover wrote:It is a gray area for legal action.

Nope. It's black and white. Anonymous forum. No libel.

sealover wrote:But shouldn't that be enough to get them banned.

Shouldn't any name beginning with the letters "IB" be enough to get someone banned?

IBdaMann wrote:

sea lover wrote:Greetings newcomers ... This website has a notorious history.

Be afraid, be very, very afraid.

seal over wrote:So tragic.

seal over wrote:People wanted to discuss a matter of tremendous importance to humanity.

seal over wrote:What they got was a place where the unsuspecting were pounced upon by a team of sadists.

seal over wrote:As a real world troll, I find it particularly hilarious to pretend that my position has something to do with valid science.

seal over wrote:Frank and I ate these pies and I've only known him a few weeks.

sealover wrote:
Ten years ago, last time I did climate debate, one of my fellow trollslayers was a serial pest tracker.
...deleted excess...

sealover wrote:Ten years ago, last time I did climate debate, one of my fellow trollslayers was a serial pest tracker.

HarveyH55 wrote:Somehow, I get the impression it's not trolls, but that this is a non-climate cult website. All non-believers must be destroyed. There must be thousands of cult-friendly climate website. Should be easy to find a site, with the right fit, for any cult member, where they gleefully chant mantra, regurgitate the daily doom and gloom, moderated to keep out the true-seers.

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote:On a personal level, I find you to be a repulsive, vile, disgusting... not enough adjectives for how much I despise you.

How about contemptible, noxious, repugnant, despicable, abhorrent, revolting,
depraved? Those are some good ones.

sealover wrote:As a real world chemist, you enrage me on a different level.

I know. I enrage your religious sensitivities. I get it. I totally get it.

sealover wrote:That is your scientific specialization, correct?

I have many. You may also consider me this board's expert on the scientific method.

sealover wrote:Did you really think you could bluff ...

Nope. I gave up bluffing decades ago. I found it unnecessary. If I am honest, I don't have to keep track of all the lies I make and I never have to pivot or shift goalposts.

My policy is to strictly be honest and to stick with math, science, logic and economics. Remember, honesty is the best policy. You should give it a try for once.

sealover wrote:Have you finally figured out that I really am a chemist?

You should actually read my posts. I have said as much. You are a chemist. You are a liar. You are a warmizombie. I stick with direct observations.

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote:All the posts that I DID read when I first got here called me a LIAR about it.

No, I assure you, I simply called you a liar in general.

sealover wrote:Do you ever read your own posts?

Yes, after I write them.

sealover wrote:They might offer some insight into why nobody likes to play with you.

The reason nobody likes me is that nobody likes a know-it-all. It's why I don't have any friends.


Cheers.